[Drizzt]

Gun Nut
What happens when an avowed anti-gun crusader picks up a revolver?

Louise Rafkin Sunday, July 20, 2003

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Up front you need to know that I have always been an avid anti-gun crusader. I cringe when reading headlines about accidental shootings and curse politicians who block gun control laws. I consider "Guns don't kill people, people kill people" the most cleverly concocted slogan in the history of spin.

You need to know this, but this is not what I tell the gun safety instructor at a local rifle range who is set to lead me through a basic handgun lesson, which will conclude with me shooting real weapons stocked with live ammo. Though I don't share my political convictions with the gracious instructor, I do admit I've always wondered what it's like to handle a gun. The idea of shooting seems both interesting, terrifying - and slightly naughty.

Good lefty girls don't shoot guns.

My instructor, an ex-policewoman, is a trim, 45-year-old powerhouse who has been shooting guns for more than 20 years. From beneath her well-ordered desk, she produces two gleaming specimens: a shining silver revolver and a matte black semiautomatic. I'm a little scared, but also mesmerized. "They're quite beautiful," I blurt out before I realize what I've said.

"People fall in love with guns," she says, obviously infatuated herself.

Over the next hour, I learn more than I thought I'd ever want to know about guns. I'm not mechanically minded, and I've never understood how a gun actually works. I still don't, even after I'm shown in exacting detail. "Think about how a champagne cork pops," she tells me.

I even look down the barrel of the revolver, which is, oddly, spiraled inside. "That's the rifle," I'm told. "Rifling helps the ammo fly straighter, longer." I also learn that "full metal jacket" is not just the title of a movie, but the name given by the U.S. military to the copper casing on a lead bullet. At some point, it was discovered that a full "jacket" was more lethal to humans than a half-clothed slug. "It was when they realized it was more efficient to clean up dead bodies than treat the wounded," my instructor says gravely.

My growing pro-gun mentality momentarily wanes.

I'm shown levers and buttons and triggers, and I'm soon handling both pieces without much fear. Loading the revolver is easy; slipping the "rounds" into the channels of steel feels reminiscent of playing with children's blocks.

But loading the semiautomatic is difficult: Stacking the cone-shaped slugs on top of one another in their removable magazine somehow underscores how lethal this weapon is.

Eventually, we're off to the shooting range. The lanes, arranged like a bowling alley, are polka-dotted with bullet holes - evidence of really poor shooting. Next to me are a pair of off-duty police officers; one fires. Tense as a fence, I jump completely off the ground. My heart is working overtime and I feel slightly claustrophobic inside safety glasses and ear protectors.

I set my feet apart, extend my arms, and focus down the barrel to a paper target run out on a taut wire. With my left thumb, I cock the trigger. And then, after only a slight hesitation, I flex. The noise is loud and jarring, but the recoil isn't bad. A surge of adrenaline jolts through my chest and a slight tingling floods the back of my neck. Though it wasn't all that easy to pull the trigger back - I had to put some real pressure on it - I feel like I've broken through some kind of invisible barrier: I'm no longer a gun virgin.

And, wonder of wonders, peering out past my still-extended arms, I see I have hit the target. Not the bull's-eye, but one of the inner rings. Suddenly, I feel a little like I'm playing a carnival game and I'm driven to win the big stuffed bear. I take time setting up the next shots, gloating only a little when my hand-eye coordination is lauded.

After a few rounds, I trade the now-warm revolver and pick up the semiautomatic. The feel of this more powerful weapon is different. I have a creepy split-second insight: I could - if I wanted to - turn, pull the trigger and shoot dead everyone in sight. Suddenly I think of those crimes of passion I've read about: people who "go off" at their boss or the kid at the Kmart who can't work the register. Guns are so clearly about quick, non-intimate power. Anyone with access to a few hundred dollars can buy a final say. Uneasy, I return my concentration to shooting. By the time the target is reeled in, a ring of half-inch holes clusters within inches of the center dot.

Driving home, I'm exhausted, as if I've worked out. But I'm also a little exhilarated. Have I changed? If I absolutely had to - for self-defense; in defense of others - would I use a gun?

I don't know. But I might go shooting again, especially if there were a place to shoot that didn't feel so odd. Perhaps a combination shooting range, bookstore and coffee shop with colorful targets designed by fabulous artists?

Later, I phone an anti-gun friend. "I know how to unload a gun," I say, trying to convince her of the merits of my adventure. "Target shooting seems fun. Going for the bull's-eye and all."

"Try darts," she says flatly.




Aside from writing, Louise Rafkin is a lifelong martial artist and teaches self-defense and Indonesian karate in North Oakland.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2003/07/20/CM141915.DTL

[RAY WOODROW 3RD]

I'm sorry but what type of instructor tells their student:

"It was when they realized it was more efficient to clean up dead bodies than treat the wounded," my instructor says gravely.

Do any of the other instructors that float on this board do this with their students?

Finally, the following quote explains to us why the anti's do not want us to have guns. They do not want us to have them because they think all gun owners feel the way she does, and I quote:

"I have a creepy split-second insight: I could - if I wanted to - turn, pull the trigger and shoot dead everyone in sight."

Anti's are very scary people! I have never thought like that in my life!

[Mark Tyson]

Maybe she's projecting her own homicidal impulses onto others! Paging doctor Freud!

[Moparmike]

Anti's are very scary people! I have never thought like that in my life!Well, I dont think to do stuff like that, but I do think of the things that are within the realm of possibility, and a quick person with a handgun can take out a significant number of people before anyone realizes what is going on. But I also consider what my actions would be if said thing could happen.

Scary stuff indeed.

[Duncan Idaho]

Do any of the other instructors that float on this board do this with their students?I would never tell students something like that, mostly because it isn't true. She has it exactly backwards.

FMJ bullets are meant to resist expansion in order to decrease the magnitude (and ghastly nature) of bullet wounds. Generals and such go along with the practice because they understand that one of the side benefits of FMJ is the high number of causualties that will live at least long enough to be taken off the field and treated for their wounds.

That means that the enemy will be expending time, resources, personnel, etc. on what have effectively become non-combatants.

But what can one expect from Kommiefornians?

[lee n. field]

The things that jump right out:

I'm not mechanically minded, and I've never understood how a gun actually works./QUOTE]

[QUOTE]I even look down the barrel of the revolver,

I have a creepy split-second insight: I could - if I wanted to - turn, pull the trigger and shoot dead everyone in sight.

For a couple seconds, until the range officer and the other folks at the _shooting_ _range_ figure out they're being shot at.


Give her some time. A few more range sessions and she might turn out all right.

[jsalcedo]

She is typical of most brainwashed leftist anti's I've had the displeasure of meeting.

I've taken some anti gunners shooting and they had a "fabulous time".

Their views didn't change much but at least a seed of an idea was planted that guns aren't evil and gun owners aren't ignorant cross burning rednecks.

Anti-gunners don't trust themselves and are prone to irrational fears regarding things they don't understand. At least from my observation.

Its kind of like a teetotaler who has never taken a drink.

There is strong temptation to partake of the forbidden evil pleasure of booze even though they constantly preach and lobby against the sins of
drinking.

They fear that one drink will turn them into a staggering alcoholic.

Anti gunners think a gun will turn them into a mass murderer.

[Duncan Idaho]

Guns are so clearly about quick, non-intimate power.And fruitcakes are so clearly...well, fruitcakes.

Is there something in the water down there?

[sshbiker]

"I could - if I wanted to - turn, pull the trigger and shoot dead everyone in sight"

I cannot for the life of me understand this statement, nor the mentality from which it came.

Shawn

[Standing Wolf]

I cannot for the life of me understand this statement, nor the mentality from which it came.

Leftists are out of touch with reality.

[Baba Louie]

Hoplophobes...

Ya gotta wonder how she manages to cut up a turkey at Thanksgiving and not pause for a second and look around the table with a funny look on her face...

Enough weirdness in that article to spook most bliss-ninnies.

Still and all; she came, she saw, she...

Adios

[J.J.]

Mark-
Freud’s not the one to call, for him most everything has to do with fornication and sexual gratification.
_______
I understand not being mechanical minded but HOW can you not see how a gun works... its pretty simple... i mean the basics of it...

______
I am taking some Anti's/never held and fired a gun before types to the range in a few weeks (co-workers who learned I recently purchased a gun). So I find it interesting that someone who has never held a gun may think that, so I shall have to learn from such a umm personality and try to steer away from things that can cause thoughts like that.

[Sunray]

That so-called instructor is nuts. Mind you, the last people who should be teaching new shooters are cops. Given the never ending reports of their careless use of firearms.

[Silver Bullet]

combination shooting range, bookstore and coffee shop with colorful targets designed by fabulous artists
Now we're thinking ! ;)

[gun-fucious]

I cannot for the life of me understand this statement, nor the mentality from which it came.

http://www.jpfo.org/ragingagainstselfdefense.htm

How does my correspondent "know" that his neighbors would murder him if they had guns? He doesn't. What he was really saying was that if he had a gun, he might murder his neighbors if he had a bad day, or if they took his parking space, or played their stereos too loud. This is an example of what mental health professionals call projection – unconsciously projecting one's own unacceptable feelings onto other people, so that one doesn't have to own them.3 In some cases, the intolerable feelings are projected not onto a person, but onto an inanimate object, such as a gun,4 so that the projector believes the gun itself will murder him.

Projection is a defense mechanism. Defense mechanisms are unconscious psychological mechanisms that protect us from feelings that we cannot consciously accept.5 They operate without our awareness, so that we don't have to deal consciously with "forbidden" feelings and impulses. Thus, if you asked my e-mail correspondent if he really wanted to murder his neighbors, he would vehemently deny it, and insist that other people want to kill him.

[J.J.]

gun-fucious That is my type of website... (I am a Psychology and sociology DBL major) What else do you have up your sleeve??

[JohnKSa]

At some point, it was discovered that a full "jacket" was more lethal to humans than a half-clothed slug. "It was when they realized it was more efficient to clean up dead bodies than treat the wounded," my instructor says gravely.
Maybe an instructor, but almost certainly not an NRA certified instructor.

You're not even supposed to use the word weapon in a Basic Firearms course if you are an NRA certified instructor. The wisdom of that rule becomes suddenly, glaringly apparent.

[Carnitas]

J.J. :

Try this one out.

http://www.keepandbeararms.com/information/tao.asp

[Sylvilagus Aquaticus]

I have a creepy split-second insight: I could - if I wanted to - turn, pull the trigger and shoot dead everyone in sight.

One wonders if this could be a 'hidden agenda' in that someone so horribly, violently revolted by the concept of firearms could some day twist off and further that agenda by making themselves the 'worst case scenario' they rail against so.

Stockton, CA type incidents come to mind.

Regards,
Rabbit.

[longeyes]

"I have a creepy split-second
insight: I could - if I wanted to - turn, pull the trigger and shoot dead everyone in
sight. Suddenly I think of those crimes of passion I've read about : people who "go
off" at their boss or the kid at the Kmart who can't work the register. Guns are so
clearly about quick, non-intimate power. Anyone with access to a few hundred
dollars can buy a final say. Uneasy, I return my concentration to shooting. By the
time the target is reeled in, a ring of half-inch holes clusters within inches of the
center dot."

I've had more than one anti- tell me he/she would never get a gun because
he/she would probably start blowing people away. One reason they are
anti-s is that they think that WE are like THEM.

[MeekandMild]

Interesting, but in my experiance antis seem to become less rabid after they go to psychotherapy or otherwise undergo a "corrective" experiance to make them more mature. I firmly believe Freud was right about them.

[FW]

A very important lesson from this story:

Being a police officer and/or shooting for many years does NOT make someone an expert on firearms.

[Orthonym]

Y'all are missing the point. I think that this person, like most:rolleyes: journalists, needs to learn to read, write , and speak the English language before she's allowed access to scissors with points on them, let alone a firearm!

[JohnKSa]

On second thought, the article is pure propaganda.

The whole point is that semi-autos are REALLY EVIL. Much more so than revolvers.

While shooting the revolver, she focused on the sensation of shooting. She's hitting the target, it's like a game, it's like being at the carnival, she's gloating over her newfound marksmanship skills, she thinks of stuffed animals. Loading the revolver is easy, like playing with blocks...

THEN (DUM Dum dum)

She picked up the semi-auto and was stricken by the intrinsic evil of the weapon. Her thoughts turned to carnage, mass murder. She realizes that this weapon will corrupt some people. She is uneasy as she gets back to shooting. Just loading the weapon is sinister, difficult, somehow imparts a feeling of lethality...

After re-reading the piece, it seems entirely likely that she's never shot a gun in her life and she made up this piece to give her starting premise that semi-autos are ESPECIALLY evil a little credibility.

[blue86buick]

...as I have had thoughts similar to this woman, but not even close to what she has had. I only mean this in the "i have the potential for massive destruction/death at my control...i wonder..." sort of feeling. However, NEVER yet has it been with a gun. I say yet, as I am human, and my mind runs a million miles an hour sometimes. Most often this feeling is while driving my car down the high/freeway, and then, most often while going around curvy off/on ramps. HOWEVER, this does NOT mean I'm suicidial, have a desire to take out lots of people, want to trash my car, or anything of the sort. I'm just curious, and my mind wanders. I think that this is normal, and anyone who denies having thoughts of this nature even occasionally, is lying to themself. You don't have to tell anyone, just don't think that you never have them.

Two final thoughts. Again, maybe I'm the only strange one (besides this woman). Secondly, when I have these thoughts, they don't scare me, because I'm intelligent enough to realize that as long as I never act on them, they'll never be a problem. I just hope others are as well.

[Gordon Fink]

My e-mailed response:

I recently read Louise Rafkin’s thoughts on learning to use a handgun for the first time. Though I’m glad to see that Ms. Rafkin has taken her first small step toward realizing that firearms are merely tools (that can be abused or misused just like any other tool), I feel the need to comment on a few of the points she made in her column.

First, the ever popular “guns don’t kill people; people kill people” slogan is a little more than just clever “spin.” The slogan is true in a very fundamental sense. Yes, firearms can be used to kill or injure (rightly or wrongly), but a gun can do nothing without a human to fire it. Firearms can be misused, just like kitchen knives, cars, and baseball bats can be misused. It’s the intent of the user that matters. As far as “accidents” go, firearms are not even currently among the top 10 causes of death and injury. (Swimming pools are far more dangerous in this respect.)

I was surprised and startled to read that Ms. Rafkin’s instructor let her look down the barrel of a revolver, as this violates one of the cardinal rules of firearms safety. Then again, I must question the instructor’s competence after reading her fanciful and incorrect explanation of the history behind metal-jacketed ammunition. Fortunately, Ms. Rafkin seems to have escaped unharmed.

I was also bemused by Ms. Rafkin’s description of a semi-automatic pistol as a “more powerful weapon” than a revolver. In general, semi-automatics fire low- to medium-powered handgun ammunition. The higher-powered handgun cartridges are most frequently reserved for sturdier revolvers. Perhaps the black color of the semi-automatic pistol frightened Ms. Rafkin.

I must also address Ms. Rafkin’s “insight” that she could “shoot dead everyone in sight” with her handgun. That thought from her was indeed “creepy” for me to read. (I hope she doesn’t also contemplate running down everyone in sight whenever she gets behind the wheel of a car.) However, if Ms. Rafkin did open fire upon innocents, she could expect to be shot herself by another armed citizen or police officer, and/or she would be subsequently arrested, prosecuted, and sent to prison by the criminal-justice system.

Ms. Rafkin’s final comment deserves mention, as well. After describing her incipient enthusiasm for target shooting to an anti-gun friend, her friend suggests that she “[t]ry darts” instead. Let us remember that darts too started out as weapons and can still be misused to harm innocents, just like a gun … or a pair of scissors … or a hammer …

~G. Fink

[Parker Dean]

I agree with the propaganda theory. What struck me first was this line:

...I trade the now-warm revolver and pick up the semiautomatic. The feel of this more powerful weapon is different.

As has been noted the attempt is to make the revolver seem like a toy while that EEEEVIIIILLLL semiautomatic is far more dangerous.

I too fail to understand, no comprehend, the mentality of this passage:

I have a creepy split-second insight: I could - if I wanted to - turn, pull the trigger and shoot dead everyone in sight.

I've read the projection theories before and while I can see the process I just can't grasp the idea that people think like that. But since Anti's apparently DO think like that, the propaganda of the article works. Any good Leftie will immediately think "SEE! I told you guns make people murderous! It IS the guns fault!"

There are quite a number of other issues with this article, not the least that I too doubt she ever went to a range, talked to a RO, or is even a woman :D but I'll leave it be.

[Geech]

Regarding her looking down the barrel, the gun attached to that barrel was a revolver, if the cylinder is open that should be perfectly safe. After all, don't people usually clean revolvers from the muzzle?

[c_yeager]

Yes, and part of the well regarded "revolver checkout" does indeed invovle looking down the muzzle. I dont really see how this is necessarily a bad thing. And to be honest i think a LOT of anti-gun people (at least those that obssess with it) have the same "i would kill everyone around me if i had one of those" mentality. This is why they FEAR guns. They think that everyone else is a ticking time bomb just like thmeselves. Scary thought isnt it?

[swampsniper]

c_yeager, I think you just hit closer to the truth than you may know. Almost every one of several former "antis" I taught to shoot showed signs that made me a little edgey. There is just some indefinable signal they transmit.:what:

[XavierBreath]

"I have a creepy split-second insight: I could - if I wanted to - turn, pull the trigger and shoot dead everyone in sight."

This feeling is not as odd as many here might think, and many adults have felt it at one time or another when first handling a loaded firearm. It is a realization of the power and responsibility that one possesses with the weapon. I would prefer to shoot with someone who HAS felt this, and chosen not to act on it than a person who has never felt it at all. Obviously it is a fantasy thought. In Baton Rouge, during the last year of the serial killer, many anti-gun type women saw new value in firearms and went to classes to learn to shoot. Many of the same feelings were expressed.

The FMJ error is a typical police not knowing what they are talking about mistake. Had the instructor been a military woman, the instruction would likely have been different. The same goes for the pistol is more powerful error. Even pro-gunners often equate capacity with power. Power is a term that is hard to pin down. People who know ammo think in terminal ballistics. People who are new to guns think capacity.

The one thing that jumps out at me from this article is that the instructor means everything to a new shooter. Because a person has been in law enforcement does NOT make them qualified to instruct. Neither does 50 years of experience in shooting. A good instructor learns how to teach as well as how to quickly catch dangerous mistakes, and how to refer a student to a reference if an answer is unknown. Eventhough the instructor's credentials are not shown, I'll give her the benefit of the doubt. You have to remember that the errors Louise Rafkin made reflect more on her ability to learn than the instructor's ability to teach.

I kind of have the feeling that the article is legitimate, that is was written by an anti-gunner, and hopefully the lady will buy a gun and continue shooting. At the very least, she educated herself. I give her credit for that, and for writing about it in a publication that is read by other anti-gunners. I feel she did OK.

[boltaction]

"It was when they realized it was more efficient to clean up dead bodies than treat the wounded," my instructor says gravely.

Do any of the other instructors that float on this board do this with their students?

Ray,

I agree with you. As an instructor, that hit me like fingernails on a blackboard. That type of violent imagery HAS NO PLACE in the class room. I am very interested in terminal ballistics, and would love to teach about wound channels, aorta shots, the "one-stop shot" problem, etc. but generally, YOU CAN'T DO IT. The only exception I ever made to that rule was a short discussion of terminal ballistics as part of a CCW class with two personal friends of mine as students - they were both already NRA members. Even, then, the material was presented very "clinically", and not with any of that "clean up the dead" stuff. Makes the skin crawl . Good thing she did not lose the anti right then and there.

PS - Do not mean to go off topic here, but this is like the word "WEAPON" - we do not use the "W" word in our classes...we teach that w***** is NOT the same as firearm, and I discourage strongly its use in the way. A gun is a gun, a hockey stick is a hockey stick - CAN either be USED as a weapon? Yes or no. Most of my guns are for punching holes in paper. Might I someday use one as a weapon to defend myself? Possibly. Same is true of the baseball bat out in garage - but I do not tell my son to go out and grab the baseball and "weapon" so we can hit a few around. So weapon indicates the mode of use; it is NOT a general descriptor. Calling firearms "weapons" places us in the hands of the antis.

Boltaction

[greyhound]

I also notice there was no mention of any of the 4 rules, or what condition the revolver was in when she was looking down the barrel.

If I was an anti, that article would pretty much reinforce my beliefs.

[Carnitas]

Some respectible reaseacher in phychology needs to investigate this possible connection between anti's and projecting thoughts of mass killing.

If you could establis that anti's are ticking timebombs but for the means to do evil we could simply properly diagnose them, help them understand their illness and that their fear is weapons is fobia and therefore shouldent be the cause of taking away others rights. No more then a person with a fear of fly is justified in pushing anti airplane legisltaion.

[Art Eatman]

When I run across articles like this, I like to write a polite and friendly letter or email describing some of my own background with firearms. After all, my mother gave me my first .22 rifle when I was eleven years old--almost 60 years ago. In spite of all the "inherent evil of guns", and my possession of quite a few over the last 50 and more years, I still pass the NICS test.

:), Art

[chas_martel]

In my most respectful manner,

your comment:

> I think that this is normal, and anyone who denies having thoughts of this >nature even occasionally, is lying to themself.

Is absolutely wrong.

You are being very presumptive. It is NOT NORMAL and there are many of us
that have never had one of these feelings.

In my not so humble opinion you should seek help before touching a gun again.

Good luck.

[hansolo]

"Duncan" refers to my state as "Kommiefornia"; First of all, it is a handful of politicians fault that we CALIFORNIANS suffer limited 2nd Amendment rights.....also, there are a handful of states that are even MORE persecuted than CA.

If you feel, as I do, that folks who support the 2nd should stick together, please don't shoot youself, and OTHER firearm enthusiasts in the foot by rediculing The state called home at different times by Charleton Heston,
Tom Selleck, Rob Leatham.

[carp killer]

[QUOTE]"Duncan" refers to my state as "Kommiefornia"; First of all, it is a handful of politicians fault that we CALIFORNIANS suffer limited 2nd Amendment rights.....also, there are a handful of states that are even MORE persecuted than CA.

If you feel, as I do, that folks who support the 2nd should stick together, please don't shoot youself, and OTHER firearm enthusiasts in the foot by rediculing The state called home at different times by Charleton Heston,
Tom Selleck, Rob Leatham.



Just relax, I'm quite sure Duncan didn't mean that the individual gun owner stuck in Kali is a Marxist. But I think he was pointing to the government in the state capitol, who have said the the U.S. Constitution is a worthless piece of trash and that gun owners in this state are the chattel of the state. And that a Kali gun owner has to obey the edicts of the state first and formost and the Federal law be damned.

[dav]

This story is written too perfectly. It contains lots of "anti" spin hidden in a "pro" story.

I simply cannot accept that any of what is purported to have taken place did, in the manner described.

I think it is a work of fiction.

[blue86buick]

chas_martel:

your comment:

...

Is absolutely wrong.

You are being very presumptive. It is NOT NORMAL and there are many of us that have never had one of these feelings.

In my not so humble opinion you should seek help before touching a gun again.

Good luck.

May
I need to clarify. Heck, maybe I should edit that post and delete the contents...oh well, too late for the internet. As I said, I have never had those thoughts involve a gun. Secondly, I do not TRY to have them. That would be sick. As Xavierbreath said:

"I have a creepy split-second insight: I could - if I wanted to - turn, pull the trigger and shoot dead everyone in sight."

This feeling is not as odd as many here might think, and many adults have felt it at one time or another when first handling a loaded firearm. It is a realization of the power and responsibility that one possesses with the weapon. I would prefer to shoot with someone who HAS felt this, and chosen not to act on it than a person who has never felt it at all. Obviously it is a fantasy thought.

(assuming fantasy to mean non-reality, not a mystical desire)

That is exactly what I'm referring to. Although, he says "when first handling," where I differed is I mentioned recurring thoughts. They are NOT even close to being frequent, or on any regular basis. Just like someone who's not good at darts (like me) hitting the center of the bullseye, sometimes it happens, most often it doesn't.

Again, the important part is, when they have happened, they have NOT been acted on. That is key. I have been thinking about this since I posted, and realized where I was not clear, and had an epiphany.

Point 1: These are NOT desires. I do NOT want to spin my car, and barrel roll it down the freeway 50 yards, or off the side of the off ramp. I DO wonder, "What if?" Tis the nature of being curious and of a technical mind. I do NOT want to kill or injure anyone, ever, for any reason (as is the sentiment shared by many, if not all, people here on THR). However, I hope that God gives me what is necessary to do so if needed (as is the sentiment shared by many, if not all, people here on THR).

Point 2: As a ___-religious person (PM me if you want to discuss the ___), I have come to the belief that these thoughts are not of my own creation, but of Satan's. Once created, it is my own, and up to me what I do. It is when I have God on my side, that I can overcome Satan, and not follow through. If you think that's a load of BS, fine. Your opinion; you're entitled.

However, if it comes to it, I will respectfully follow your advice. I consider myself an intelligent person...when I drink, I don't drive. When I'm going to drive, I don't drink. When I think straight, I shoot. If I stop thinking straight, I'll get rid of my guns until I get help.

[geekWithA.45]

Anti gunners are frequently fascinated with gun owners wielding "The Power of Death" (you really can hear the capitol letters when they speak!), and initially find it hard to relate to firearms in any other terms.

All they see in their minds is coffins and dead babies.

Case in point: A good friend of mine _was_ what I would characterize as a "marginal anti", meaning that he theoretically supported 2A in the abstract, acknowledged the "right to hunt" and perhaps keep rifles in the home, but got weirder when it came to handguns, and even weirder at the thought that perfectly normal people carry them around with them.

Early on, shortly after I got my first pistol, he made some comment about how my hard won FID was a "license to kill", demonstrating the sort of death fascination from which the anti impulse springs.

In a flash of inspiration, I immediately corrected him.

"I DO NOT have a license to kill. Actually, I have EXACTLY the same rights that you have. I have the right to defend myself and my family, just like you. The ONLY difference between you an me is that I possess effective means to actually perform that defense, and you don't. Now, I'm not saying that guns are for everybody, or even for you. It's an intensely personal choice, but it is that: a legitimate choice that no one has the right to interfere with."

He looked sharply at me, and was silent for a long time. Eventually, he started nodding.

[raz-0]

YEah, I have to go with the contingent that thinks the antis have some sort of mental hang up.

Every time I read the anti trying a gun type of article, there is always some sort of weilding the power of death/god/etc. type of revelation. Also, a high percentage of them include the "I could kill anyone I want" bit as well.

Personally, the only epiphany like thought I had when first shooting ran along the lines of "what you are doing now is not forgiving if you screw up."

[Legionnaire]

I have to go with the contingent that thinks the antis have some sort of mental hang up. Agreed. That's why Jeff Cooper (I believe) coined the term "hoplophobe." A phobia is a "irrational fear."

[goon]

I fell in love with guns long before I even knew what I was in for.
I had a hell of a collection of toy guns as a kid, and a few of them were made out of wood and steel.
They were made by a company called Parris.
I had a couple muzzleloader style pistols and a rifle. I wanted to see what made them tick, so I took them apart.
I was fascinated by the moving parts, and how they worked.
How did someone come up with the idea of a doglock, then a flintlock, etc.?
That guy must have been a visionary.
John Browning, Paul Mauser, John Garand, Mikhail Kalishnikov: all those guys must have been geniuses (still are in the case of Kalishnikov).

As far as the point the author made about how she could go nuts and start shooting people; that is true.
When it comes down to it, I can do anything I want. Legal or not, I have the power to do anything that I am physically capable of doing.
There would surely be consequences for some of those choices, but I could do them anyhow.
The laws don't really prevent you from doing anything, they just tell you what the consequences will be if you do something.
At the end of the day, I control me.
Not the law, not my neighbor, me.
I don't hurt people because I don't want to.
The law has got nothing to do with it.

[Moparmike]

Goon, your philosophy is desperately needed in 95% of the Liberals heads. I propose you start preparing for some philosophy grafting.:cool:

[hillbilly]

Here's what I wrote to Louise Rafkin, just minutes ago.





I noticed this description of you at the end of the column.

"Aside from writing, Louise Rafkin is a lifelong martial artist and teaches
self-defense and Indonesian karate in North Oakland. "

In the column, you describe realizing that at the range, you thought you
could turn and shoot every one there and were scared of that power.

Tell me, do you also walk down the street thinking about all the people
whose necks you could break and ribs you could fracture using your
Indonesian karate knowledge and skills?

Or, are you, the lefty anti-gun crusader, perfectly capable of controlling
your homicidal instincts when it comes to your hands, feet, elbows and
knees, and only get those thoughts when you hold an obviously magical object
called a gun which obviously emits secret brain waves which control your
thoughts about killing people?

Of course.....guns have those secret magical powers over human brains,
right?

But learning how to take people out with your bare hands, with elbow strikes
and arm-breaking joint locks and lethal kicks, and even eye-gouging doesn't
affect human brains.....especially the brains of anti-gun crusaders with
enlightened lefty views who are clearly superior than all those
knuckle-dragging folks who like those evil, magical guns.

I mean c'mon, folks who like guns live in the South, or other parts of that
vast cultural wasteland known as "fly-over country" between the two
enlightened coasts, right?


But, I am glad that unlike lots of other anti-gunners, you actually did go
to a range and see what it is you've feared and hated for all these years.

And you found out that shooting might actually be fun and a discipline and
interesting.....sort of like breaking boards with your bare hands, only a
lot louder.

[Dilettante]

To Blue86Buick
In my most respectful manner,

your comment:

> I think that this is normal, and anyone who denies having thoughts of this >nature even occasionally, is lying to themself.

Is absolutely wrong.

You are being very presumptive. It is NOT NORMAL and there are many of us
that have never had one of these feelings.


Actually I agree with Blue86Buick. It is normal. So is thinking about jumping when you stand near the edge on top of a tall building.

The same woman probably doesn't think about running over people in her car because she actually drives cars in regular life. If she continues shooting, this silly image will also stop appearing in her head. Instead she will be thinking about how to improve her stance, grip and aim.

Supposedly the guys who build skyscrapers get used to it too.

[c_yeager]

I think there is a fine line here. When i pick up a firearm i am effected by a sense of "respect" or even awe for the power that comes with it (especially when i was getting started in the hobby). This respect is one of the things that makes so many people (myself included) so fanatical about safety. Now i think these fealings are normal. I also think there is a destructive little voice in most people that contemplates what could be done with such power. Another poster likened it to the thoughts of jumping off a tall building or structure when standing at the edge. Now the difference between what is "normal" and the writer of this article. Is that the little voice is rarely loud enough to be articulated in the words that she used. I think there is probably a little insanity in all of us. But, in some its much louder than others.

I should probably add that for some reason i think this article is completely bogus. It just doesnt have the "ring" of a first hand account of something that actually happened.

[TallPine]

I think it is a work of fiction.

Me. too.

[XavierBreath]

Hillbilly,
I have to say that I found your letter to Louise Rafkin humorous, and it's logic inescapable.

There are several differences that I would like to point out about these fantasy thoughts, however. Skill in the martial arts in so far as killing is not gained in an instant. It is gained over time, and these fantasy thoughts do not occur. For someone who is not familiar with firearms, they think that only a gun is needed to kill, and are unaware of the skill involved to employ it effectively. The erroneous nature of the fantasy does not stop it from occuring because the fantasizer does not realize the error. Once the person learns more, and feels more in control and adept these feelings go away. Much like the stepping off a ledge feeling, holding a loaded gun for the first time can give an adult these feelings. Doctors and nurses have reported these feelings when starting their practice and making life and death decisions. Soldiers who have never held a weapon report this feeling when loading a weapon for the first time in Boot Camp. It spooks the Navy enough that they keep instructors trained to shoot anyone who deviates from instruction during Basic Arms training (or at least that is what the recruits believe, I don't know for sure, I was only a recruit, not an instructor. Still had the same effect though ;)). I don't know, but the Army probably does the same. These thoughts are nothing more than the realization of the power and responsibility one holds. Children seldom get this feeling, at least not until they have seen enough Rambo movies and formed a belief system of right and wrong and have a firm grasp of life and death. This usually does not occur until early adulthood in our society.

Fundementally, I see a difference between pro-gunners and anti-gunners. Pro-gunners seem to form opinions based on logic and their own experience. Antis seem to form opinions based on emotion and the experiences of others.

While I do not agree with everything that was said in this article, I commend Ms. Rafkin for having the courage to investigate her fear, to find what she thought was a competent instructor, and to go to a range and learn to shoot. I especially commend her for writing an article about her experience, that to me at least seems to be unbiased, and then publishing that article for other anti-gunners to read. She should certainly not be crucified by us because she made some errors in her article, or because she had a fantasy thought. She should be welcomed to our side of the table. A converted enemy of one's cause is more valuable than a person who never held another side.

[swampsniper]

I never personally had impulses of the sort we are discussing. I got a Daisy Red Ryder when I was 8, and a real heavy dose on the responsiblities of growing into manhood, as you would expect from my Father eventually completing 42 years in the Army. I bought a .22 with paper route money at 13, and later at 13, an SMLE, from Sears.I was wearing a High Standard .22 pistol before I could drive. Maybe it just sort of grew on me instead of being dropped on me in one big chunk by a DI. I never had any doubt what guns could do, or of how I was expected to use them.
I would much rather teach a kid to shoot than an adult. I have trained adults so full of misconceptions as to be near untrainable. I have had them be so self conscious that they kept looking around to see if anyone was watching them. They were fighting guilt problems just from actually holding a gun.
It matters most how you are programmed before you begin. I always knew that guns were tools, just like saws, hammers and wrenches. I am dancing around trying not to offend any city folks, so I'll just say, thank God I'm a country boy.:D :D

[Blain]

At some point, it was discovered that a full "jacket" was more lethal to humans than a half-clothed slug.

What a moron to think that FMJ were more lethal to humans. Nearly everyone even remotely familiar with guns knows that isn't true!

[blue86buick]

blue86buick: Maybe i'm the only strange one... swampsniper: MAYBE IM THE ABNORMAL ONE BUT
Guess we're all a little kooky/normal in our own way, that's what makes us different. :D

Dilettante - Thank you.

c_yeager: Now the difference between what is "normal" and the writer of this article. Is that the little voice is rarely loud enough to be articulated in the words that she used. I think there is probably a little insanity in all of us. But, in some its much louder than others.

Very true. It's only if we listen to it, that it becomes a problem. I have not, and do not.

[goon]

What a moron to think that FMJ were more lethal to humans. Nearly everyone even remotely familiar with guns knows that isn't true!

To you or me, that much is obvious.
But to someone who has no knowledge of guns, whatever you tell them is fact.
If that is indeed true, it is the fault of the instructor.
She should have made sure that all the statements she made were complete, accurate and well understood.
Unless the author twisted the lesson to fit her ends...

[Gordon Fink]

I noticed this description … at the end of the column.

“Aside from writing, Louise Rafkin is a lifelong martial artist and teaches self-defense and Indonesian karate in North Oakland.”

Hillbilly, after reading the rest of the article, I took this bio to mean that Ms. Rafkin had been to two or three martial-arts classes in the last 10 to 15 years and once discussed self-defense with friends over lunch at an Indonesian restaurant. :D

~G. Fink

[Malone LaVeigh]

http://www.louiserafkin.com/

Very interesting woman. Seems to be what she says she is. Funny, though. I taught martial arts in N. Oakland from about '78 to '83, and I never heard of that school. Then again, there are a lot of schools and most are pretty insular.

[WonderNine]

barf

[igor]

The martial arts angle here seems to make it all the more weird.

What I know of these Indonesian systems, they're very edged weapons oriented and highly effective in their use - and base their whole grammar of movement on that you have one in at least one hand. How anyone who obviously teaches the stuff can have avoided this very quick-and-dirty and extremely lethal side to what she does escapes me entirely. :scrutiny: :uhoh:

What I do myself is karate complete with the Okinawan weaponry - plus, obviously, firearms. I consider any approach to martial arts that doesn't acknowledge the integrity of the whole use of force continuum, quite inadequate. Or games, sports.

How compartmentalized can a person get in her head? She certainly doesn't sound like anyone I'd be inviting over to hold a seminar...

[swampsniper]

It is a liberal "in thing" to tell everyone your're a martial arts expert. She probably considers it to be a tummy tucking exercise. The sad thing is that it is very dangerous to claim martial skills you lack. Someone might call your bluff. It is just like drawing a gun you lack the will to use. It only works in Hollywood.
I wouldn't be suprised to see this lady do something really outrageous before she is through.

[Sean Smith]

The classic example of the article that tells you more about the author than the subject.

[GSB]

I have a creepy split-second insight: I could - if I wanted to - turn, pull the trigger and shoot dead everyone in sight.

I wonder if when she gets behind the wheel of her car, she ponder the fact that she could, if she wanted to, run down everyone in sight.

[blue86buick]

I wonder if when she gets behind the wheel of her car, she ponder the fact that she could, if she wanted to, run down everyone in sight.
I wonder if when she picks up a kitchen knife to make dinner, she ponders the fact that she could, if she wanted to, turn and slice the cat to pieces. :D

[swampsniper]

If I was her cat I would not want to pee on her couch!!!!!!!!!:D

[igor]

No? "What do cats say?" :D